NANAK CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed by Nanak Chand and five other petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing first information report No. 51 dated 13.5.1991 registered at Police Station, Ding (Annexure P.1), the order dated 25.2.1992 (Annexure P-2) and the order dated 7.4.1992 (Annexure P.3) vide which the petitioners were charged for an offence under Section 307 Indian Penal Code and the petitioners Budi Ram and Bag Chand were summoned by the trial Court.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case giving rise to the filing of this petition are that Hans Raj respondent No. 2 cultivated the land of Raj Kumar who lived in Delhi for the last 15 years. Bag Chand petitioner was the attorney of Raj Kumar. Father of Hans Raj had instituted a suit with respect to the land under cultivation of Hans Raj and that suit was pending in a Court. The suit was defended by Budi Ram and Bag Chand and they wanted to disposes Hans Raj. On 12.5.1991 Hans Raj, his wife Raj Rani and brother Lachman Dass were present in the house when at about 10.00.P.M. all the petitioners entered the courtyard of the house of Hans Raj armed with Lathis and Gandasis. Budi Ram exhorted his companions and then he and Sham Chand attacked Hans Raj and hit him on his head with Gandasi. Bag Chand and Tilak Raj caused two injuries on the head of Lachhman Dass. All the petitioners caused further blows to Hans Raj, his brother Lachhman Dass and Raj Rani. The occurrence was witnessed by Karam Chand and Mohna Ram of village Bhavdeen. After the incident the injured were removed to the hospital at Sirsa where they were medically examined. The injury on the head of Raj Rani was found grievous after X-ray examination. One of the injuries found on the person of Lachhman Dass also grievous. At the instance of Hans Raj a case was registered against the petitioners and after investigation all the petitioners except Budi Ram and Bag Chand were challenged. Names of Budi Ram and Bag Chand were shown in column No.2 of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.

(3.) ON 7.4.1992 the parties were heard on charge and the learned Additional Sessions Judge passed order that a charge under Sections 452, 307, 326, 324, 323, 148 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code be framed against the petitioners.